Anthony Hicks v. State of Mississippi
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
NO. 2002-KA-00916-COA
ANTHONY HICKS
APPELLANT
v.
STATE OF MISSISSIPPI
DATE OF TRIAL COURT JUDGMENT:
TRIAL JUDGE:
COURT FROM WHICH APPEALED:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT:
ATTORNEY FOR APPELLEE:
DISTRICT ATTORNEY:
NATURE OF THE CASE:
TRIAL COURT DISPOSITION:
DISPOSITION:
MOTION FOR REHEARING FILED:
CERTIORARI FILED:
MANDATE ISSUED:
APPELLEE
5/15/2002
HON. JANNIE M. LEWIS
HOLMES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT
W. S. STUCKEY
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
BY: CHARLES W. MARIS
JAMES H. POWELL, III
CRIMINAL - FELONY
CONVICTED OF ASSAULT OF A LAW
ENFORCEMENT OFFICER - SENTENCED TO
SERVE A TERM OF THREE YEARS IN THE
CUSTODY OF MDOC.
AFFIRMED - 5/13/2003
BEFORE KING, P.J., MYERS AND GRIFFIS, JJ.
MYERS, J., FOR THE COURT:
¶1.
Anthony Hicks appeals his conviction of an assault on an officer. The only issue he presents to us
is:
THE VERDICT WAS AGAINST THE OVERWHELMING WEIGHT OF THE EVIDENCE
STATEMENT OF FACTS
¶2.
Hicks was an inmate at the Holmes County Correctional Facility. He refused to return to his cell
after being informed that it would be later in the day before he could go to canteen call. Hicks requested
to speak with the warden. The warden did speak with Hicks but Hicks still refused to return to his cell.
The warden and several guards tried to coerce Hicks into his cell, but Hicks responded with a violent
outburst. He attacked and wounded the warden. Several officers were required to pull Hicks off the
warden. Hicks refused to be subdued which resulted in Mace being used.
¶3.
Hicks argued that he started punching the warden only after being Maced. He was granted an
instruction of self-defense. The testimony and a videotape shows that Hicks attacked the warden prior
to being Maced. Hicks was able to move around one guard and grab the retreating warden.
LEGAL ANALYSIS
¶4.
As to the weight of the evidence, the trial judge is given wide discretion to order a new trial in the
face of overwhelming evidence contrary to the jury’s verdict in order to prevent an unconscionable
injustice. Braxton v. State, 797 So. 2d 826, 828 (¶6) (Miss. 2000). The jury was able to hear testimony
from both sides recounting the facts stated earlier. The jury was also allowed to view a videotape of the
assault. The jury chose to believe the evidence presented by the prosecution. The trial judge did not abuse
his discretion in refusing the request for a new trial.
CONCLUSION
¶5.
This Court cannot say that the verdict was against the overwhelming weight of the evidence nor was
the evidence insufficient to allow a verdict of guilty. A reasonable and fair minded jury was presented
enough evidence to reach a guilty verdict. This Court affirms the conviction.
2
¶6.
THE JUDGMENT OF THE HOLMES COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT OF CONVICTION
OF ASSAULT OF A LAW ENFORCEMENT OFFICER AND SENTENCE OF THREE YEARS
IN THE CUSTODY OF MISSISSIPPI DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS IS AFFIRMED.
COSTS OF THIS APPEAL ARE ASSESSED TO HOLMES COUNTY.
McMILLIN, C.J., KING AND SOUTHWICK, P.JJ., BRIDGES, THOMAS, LEE,
IRVING, CHANDLER AND GRIFFIS, JJ., CONCUR.
3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
